posted on Thursday, May 31, 2007 2:09 AM by Endie

Eve Online - An Update

OK, my first piece of coursework for the masters course I've started is due in on Friday, and I also have a product releasing to user acceptance testing the same day, so I've been a bit busy.  But here is an update.  I'll do the linking-to-my-sources bit when I get a chance.

Basically, CCP have been denying everything.  Even the bits they concede are true (everything bar the CCP Sharkbait claims), they deny.  The events are rigged, but hey, they're not rigged.  The devs are Best Friends Forever with BoB members and give them advanced notice of upcoming game features, but Iceland is a lonely rock where it's usually dark, and Devs need friends too!

The denials are one thing, but another is that they have threatened to sue any players who continue to claim that they are cheating.  This, of course, is a prime example of a SLAPP: a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.  This is where a company threatens an individual with legal action in order to silence that individual, relying on their greater resources to bluff the individual into backing down, despite the lack of legal merits of the case.

Goonfleet is full of lawyers.  However, CCP's tactic has apparently worked: our leader has quit and cancelled his accounts in disgust.  The new leadership has taken a more passive-aggressive line, as can be seen in this reply to CCP.  The letter is still damning of CCP's attitudes, but has retreated to more defensible lines and adopted a more conciliatory voice.  The hope is that we can force CCP to act professionally and remove its links to BoB members: the biggest complaint and the one most convincingly proven of the three.

Anyway, there has been a thread on F13 for months updating people on CCP's constant scandals and cheating.  That says something in itself!  But one new poster there recently tried to explain, in sociological and cultural terms, why many of us get so upset while CCP refuse to even accept that a problem exists, or to deal firmly with those of their employees (like T20), who are unequivocally proven to cheat and to favour their friends in BoB:

Keep in mind what Iceland is. It's an expanding rock with a lot of fish around it and one big city.  Ninety-six percent of its inhabitants belong to a single religious denomination. (Evangelical Lutheran, fyi!) When you live in this kind of hardtack land, you get an ingrained sense of cultural interdependence. There's so little habitable land in Iceland that if you have a disagreement, or break some rules, or whatever, you can't just up and move away. You can't be a singular unit - you have to interact with others, make deals with them, smooth things over, just make things work. You don't burn any bridges because odds are you're going to have to cross that bridge again.

In [North America], we can write off people no problem. You're in Cali and going to lose your house because you got fired? Move to Nevada and restart your life as a fry cook. In Iceland it's not so easy. The community is so intermingled and isolated that firing/blackballing/shaming someone not only creates much more relative trauma in their life, but creates more backlash on you. So the natural response when these kind of bad things surface is to look at the elements of good and worth - instead of the singular black marks that get you termed in the U.S. - and fix the environment, not the person. CCP, as a company, seems to follow my hypothesis pretty well.

Members of BoB, as stated earlier, have been very helpful to CCP in some endeavours and no doubt CCP appreciates this and communicates with those people in what we in NA consider wholly inappropriate because they're in the same boat - pulling the same rope - etc. In a sense, they're much more part of the team than the pole's length that NA companies expect between customer and vendor. As far as what NA customers expect, it's wholly incestuous. This isn't bad or wrong, but it IS different. When Goonfleet comes in, offering nothing of value and tearing down people that have been part of the team socially, verbally, in-game, etc., CCP's individuals tolerate them only as much as they have to. CCP's response clearly shows they could absolutely care less if every GF desubbed right now. Assuming my hypotheses are correct, not knowing this leads to some pretty ugly stuff, as we've seen.

EVE is a microcosm of Iceland itself, even. It was designed to force interdependence, in fact, it's by far the most interdependent game world in existence right now. To CCP, the notion of Pax BoB probably isn't as abhorrent as it is to NA customers, and thus they feel comfortable sending the only other major force in EVE up the river.

And again, please note that I don't think of this as bad or wrong; it's just a different way of doing things than what NA customers expect. But since CCP relies on NA customers, they're either going to have to trim their playerbase down to people who are OK with this way of thinking or become, well, Blizzard. No pun intended.

There is, necessarily, a degree of simplification there, but I find it to be a good description of at least a factor in the equation.  Another factor, of course, is "small company owned largely by their staff who are hard to fire for cheating".

Comments

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Thursday, May 31, 2007 12:35 PM by Dragon
It was a good post, far better written than most of the stuff the BoB fanbois have been espousing (with the exception of Dave who at least is coherent and offers some argument even if he does sound like a BoB zealot at times).

I'm just enjoying the popcorn! :)

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Thursday, May 31, 2007 1:40 PM by russ
"The devs are Best Friends Forever with BoB members and give them advanced notice of upcoming game features, but Iceland is a lonely rock where it's usually dark, and Devs need friends too!"

Bwhahahahahhaha

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Thursday, May 31, 2007 3:14 PM by Endie
I just had a Naked Lunch moment of self-realisation. To someone not involved, does all this sound like the sort of fatuous gossip and bitching that Second Lifers ilke Prokofy Neva indulge in? Ack!

And Dragon, who do you post as on F13? As you may know - I've said it often enough - I think that Dave is a great poster when he is being informative: he is obsessive enough to know tons about the game's depths, and arrogant enough to want nothing more than to show off his knowledge (he'd be the first to admit it: look at his avatar). But he really, really hates the "enemy". And most of GF would want it no other way.

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Thursday, May 31, 2007 3:30 PM by Dragon
DraconianOne is my nom de choix for forum boards these days. I'm currently trying not to get embroiled in why Jedi are forever going to be a bad decision as a player class in any type of SW MMO.

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Friday, June 01, 2007 7:02 PM by Timothy Burke
I don't think any of the major critics of CCP sound as unhinged as you-know-who, no. I do think there's probably some countering criticism of Goonfleet that the Goons at least need to take seriously.

I think if one takes a slight step back from the specific terms of this specific conflict, three interesting or pertinent general issues emerge:

1) How can devs play in their own MMO, but keep that play wholly professional, entirely about discovery of player culture and practice and testing of the game environment? I think CCP really has a serious problem in this respect. But I'm not convinced by the critique that some have offered, that devs should not play in their own worlds at all. In fact, one of the few really convincing bits in CCP's accusatory self-defense was the concluding part, where they talk about why you have to play in order to understand what it is that you've created.

2) How can you run role-playing or live events in a MMOG where you either need to or want to control the outcomes? I understand why devs don't want complete open-endedness, but if there is any game that should be prepared for that and able to accomodate it, it's EVE. They should be writing the game's underlying fictions to accomodate the emergent structures and actions of players, not the other way around. In any event, what I think you cannot do is promise open-endedness while privately or secretly hedging against it. And I think you're dead on target that even in their self-defense, that's what CCP more or less confesses to be doing. That's absolutely not acceptable.

3) Basically CCP doesn't seem to have prepared for a structural outcome that is now imminently looming within the game, namely, a single corporation dominating 0.0 space. Anybody who played Shadowbane enough has seen this before, to the point that I'd say it's an iron law of a PVP-centric MMOG. You cannot design a geographical or other material structure to your gameworld that will potentially allow a finite group of players to structurally lock in total domination of the gameworld UNLESS you're prepared to restart your world when that happens. Otherwise, there's no incentive to play any longer for either the victors or the losers. The alternative is equally bad for a game with the emergent and open-ended character that EVE and Shadowbane both craved, which is the artificial imposition of controls that basically make all victories short-term and structurally unimportant, as in DAOC. If you don't want to have to restart the game, then you've got to do something that makes semi-permanent structural dominance unstable: permadeath of characters, instability of resource placement, technological or social innovations that do not rise proportionately from accumulated resources or labor-time invested, shifting geographies, fixed upper boundaries on the size of player organizations, escalating NPC aggro proportionate to the resources or power of a player alliance, *something*. CCP just doesn't seem to have a clear grasp of what's coming, whereas most of us who know this genre (which includes a lot of EVE players) know what's likely to unfold barring some kind of structural change. This is why BoB favoritism seems especially stupid from CCP: it's likely to hurt, even fatally wound, their product.

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Friday, June 08, 2007 12:48 PM by JuJutsu
"To someone not involved, does all this sound like the sort of fatuous gossip and bitching that Second Lifers ilke Prokofy Neva indulge in? Ack!"

Yes. On the other hand, Prokofy doesn't post in these threads so the entertainment value is much higher.

# re: Eve Online - An Update

Friday, June 08, 2007 7:02 PM by Endie
Endie asked:
>>"To someone not involved, does all this sound like the sort of fatuous gossip and bitching that Second Lifers ilke Prokofy Neva indulge in? Ack!"

JuJutsu replied:
>Yes.

Oh, harsh. Why not give that dagger a twist while you're there? :p